The ideology that the Bharatiya Janata Party [ Images ] represents and its pan Indian appeal makes it an important cog in our democracy, argues Tarun Vijay In a nation where most of the political parties are known by the names of their 'owners' turning the political process into a kind of family fiefdom, the existence of a party that still runs on democratic norms and represents a completely different ethos, must be valued as a need of the society. That is the Bharatiya Janata Party. It is useless to indulge in the contemporary dichotomies and scuffles that mar its current framework.

These are trivialities and have been a part of every political party, including the Jan Sangh that saw much bitter scenes involving top guns even when that was hardly as strong as its new avatar the BJP has become.

The basic question is -- do we have a future for a party that symbolises Hindu aspirations and civilisational rejuvenation through political instruments and acts as a part of a larger saffron brotherhood that has grown stronger by each year since its emergence in 1925?

Suppose if there was no Jan Sangh or the BJP there would have been no Kashmir [ Images ] movement, no demands to scrap two flags and two constitutional provisions for an Indian state and abolishing two Constitutional heads system for it. Who would have taken up the cause of an invincible Indian security and carried out the Pokaran II nuclear tests while preparing for Pokaran III?

The last millennium saw the foreign attacks on Bharat that is India and the target of these barbaric assaults were essentially the Hindu population and their temples. The truncated independence should have given them the highest freedom to flower and come to their own as a free and fearless nation would have honoured the great spirit of resistance that made Allama Iqbal write 'Kuch baat hai ki hasti mit-ti nahin hamaari (There is something extraordinary that we -- the civilisation -- survived centuries of assaults)'.

But after the massacres during Partition/independence in Calcutta, Noakhali, Muzaffarabad and Rawalpindi, Hindus got the secular marginalisation and a State apparatus that looked down at anything representing their age old-bruised ethos. That is why to uphold the dignity of being a Hindu and ensure equal attitude of the State for every citizen without any discrimination on the basis of caste or religion, the Jan Sangh was founded in 1951. The principles were unity in diversity, one nation, one culture and one people and justice to all, appeasement of none.

At the first all India session of the Bharatiya Jan Sangh, its founder president Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee had said, 'India has been for centuries past the homeland of diverse people pursuing different faiths and religions. The need to preserve and respect the personal laws of such people especially in matters of religion and fundamental social obligations is undoubted. In all matters concerning the rights and duties of citizenship as such, there must be complete equality for all. We must be able to carry all sections of the people with us by creating in their minds a healthy and progressive attitude of co-operation based on true equality of opportunity and mutual tolerance and understanding. Our party's door remains open to all who believe in our programme and ideology irrespective of considerations of caste and religion.'

'Our party,' he added, 'believes that the future progress of India must be based on a natural synthesis between its full economic advance and the development of mind and character of the people in accordance with the highest traditions of Indian culture and civilization. The political freedom that we have achieved will be meaningless without economic freedom. It is a tragedy that a vast country such as India, with its almost limitless resources and raw materials, should be steeped in poverty, disease, ignorance and degradation. Our party believes that without plunging the country into the vortex of violent chaos and conflict, it should be possible for us to readjust the conditions of our economic life so as to bring to an end a shameful era of exploitation and silent human suffering.'

Without mincing any words he declared, 'Our party though, ever prepared to extend its hand of equality to all citizens, does not feel ashamed to urge for the consolidation of Hindu society, nor does it suffer from an inferiority complex to acknowledge proudly that the great edifice of Indian culture and civilization, which had stood the test of thousands of years, has been built, most of all by the labour, sacrifice and wisdom of Hindu sages, savants and patriots throughout the chequered history of our motherland. We are not so mean as to forget that in this gigantic process our country came into contact and conflict with many foreign races and ideologies and our great ancestors had the courage to fashion and refashion the country's structure in accordance with new ideas and with the changed conditions of our society. If India's freedom is to be purposeful, a correct appreciation of the fundamental features of Indian culture -- the discovery of that unity in diversity, which is the keynote of her civilization -- is highly essential.'

These lengthy quotations are essential to understand the real purpose behind the BJP, which has accepted Dr Mookerjee and Deen Dayal Upadhyaya as its sources of inspiration showing the ideological path.

There was less ideological apartheid that we see today and newspapers like The Hindu and The Hindustan Times were not looked down just because they bore a word Hindu and parties like the Hindu Mahasabha, Ram Rajya Parishad etc were in the mainstream without experiencing any kind of 'ideological untouchability'.

It's only after Independence under the influence of Nehruvian left-to-centre policies that the assertive Hindus segment was sought to be humiliated and segregated.

In the contemporary political scene, the Congress, which once represented the federal liberal character of Hindu nationalist ideas advocating equality to all, has turned into a family oriented party where internal democratic process is completely subjugated to the wishes and whims of a supreme leader who also happens to be a family head. Except for the Communist parties and the BJP there is a hardly a party that is democratically run and controlled from the grassroot levels.

Hence, in spite of internal bickering and trivial issues cropping up, a party that was born post Independence representing a distinct ideology and programmes can only be a strengthening factor for democracy. Its amazing growth and power to rule the nation quite successfully have further added to its credibility. Those who oppose it must look at the fact sheet it has so far built -- giving India the best of the highways, an IT and technological revolution, best run states in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh [ Images ] and Chhattisgarh and above all a credible opposition that has a vast acceptability at an all India level, giving a pan India character to the polity.

The poet who wrote, 'Gagan mein laharta hai bhagwa hamara (The saffron flies high in the sky)' became the most admired prime minister, the first genuinely non-Congress one and his regime saw the best of relations with neighbours. Atal Bihari Vajpayee [ Images ] allowed Pokaran II, yet maintained better ties with the US, China and Pakistan without compromising on national interest.

This party has another distinct feature -- it can boast of a galaxy of national leaders who command a mass following unlike others who have none but their 'eternally elected' chiefs alone for the posters and platforms diminishing any second or third rank leadership.

And you don't have to belong to a family or a family's durbar to aspire for higher goals and posts in the party. Someone who was a village level worker and did his bit to gain acceptance could become party president and was never told, oh you don't have a particular last name hence can rise this far and no further.

Pardon me if in this context, to clarify a bit more, I recall a Q&A session I had in China where I was asked in a university by students  'What's the use of your democracy if it can't deliver? See Bihar and Orissa and UP's rural areas and farmers suicides? We may not be having the democracy you like to ape from the West but our one party system is delivering fine.'

I was not surprised. The value of democracy can be understood only when you lose it after enjoying its fruits. I simply said, even with half filled stomachs and often self defeating noises, we prefer freedom more than a totalitarian regime guaranteeing prosperity to all.

Liberty can have no alternative. And that's exactly the most powerful factor that makes the BJP indefatigable and invincible. The party's inner core promises to rise like a Phoenix if the outer shell fails to translate the ideals it was born to achieve.

It may look a bit preposterous to say these high pedestal things when the party is making news not for some happy reasons. It is sad, but it will pass. The party is not built by those who were adherents of a family, but by those small yet strongly committed young hearts who built it on their shoulders because they shared a vision and a dream.

I have seen three generations working together, first for the Jan Sangh and then for its new avatar, the BJP. They never aspired to make it big in Delhi [ Images ] but from Silchar to Shimoga and Doda to Port Blair, they have been working. These workers are the strength of the party and not those who make big speeches and then wash dirty linen in the media. They must be powered and their moral needs to be boosted by a united commitment to principles leaders claim they accept.

Today these workers have emerged taller because they have lived the ideals espoused by Deen Dayal Upadhyaya who had merged his identity with the common cadre and lived by his principles through his own life's example. He gave the alternative ideology of integral humanism before the two alien ones namely capitalism and communism. That almost supplements and complements Gandhi's Hind Swarajya whose hundredth year is passing so unceremoniously in the raj of the 'Gandhis'.

It is this perfectly ideological rock of our civilisation represented by the BJP in politics that India needs fervently.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

"I am not prepared to discuss ethics. We have a pistol and are in a position to use it." So said Mohammad Ali Jinnah while delivering his presidential speech at the Muslim League convention on July 19, 1946.

What followed was an unimaginable massacre of Hindus in Kolkata on August 16, 1946. Six thousand killed, twenty thousand raped and maimed.

Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee, the then leader of Hindu Mahasabha had said, "Jinnah is out to destroy the very soul of India."

If one single instance should be cited to understand what Jinnah really was, it would not be his speech in the Constituent Assembly, Karachi, often quoted by Indian Hindus, but his call for "Direct Action".

That was August 16, 1946, known as the day of "great Calcutta killings". After the "Direct Action" resolution was passed by the Muslim League on July 19, 1946, its president, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, said in his valedictory speech: "What we have done today is the most historic act in our history. Never have we in the whole history of the League done anything except by the constitutional methods and by constitutionalism. But now we are obliged and forced into this position. This day we bid goodbye to constitutional methods…. Now the time has come for the Muslim Nation to resort to direct action. I am not prepared to discuss ethics. We have a pistol and are in a position to use it."

Syama Prasad Mookerjee, the then leader of the Hindu Mahasabha, who had said, "Jinnah is out to destroy the very soul of India", organized Hindus fearlessly and foiled Jinnah’s plan to oust Hindus from Kolkata. He formed a volunteer group of the Hindus named the Hindusthan National Guards, resisted horrendous goondaism of the League and moved in the riot-affected areas giving courage to the victims of a planned slaughter and orgy of violence by the League’s marauders.

Syama Prasad Mookerjee was traveling all over India awakening the masses to rise against the partition plot. On October 8, 1944, at a United Provinces Hindu Conference, he said, "The sooner Mr Jinnah understands that Pakistan in any form or shape will be resisted by Hindus and many others with the last drop of blood, the better for him, for he will then quietly descend on realities and himself plead for a just and equitable settlement. None but an agent of imperialism will so block the path of Indian unity and freedom as Mr Jinnah is doing."

Dr Mookerjee, who is respected as the ideological icon and source of inspiration by the Bharatiya Janata Party, was a devotee of Sri Aurobindo and The Mother. In fact, he had been in close contact with Sri Aurobindo, who had said, "The idea of two nationalities in India is only a new-fangled notion invented by Jinnah for his purposes and contrary to the facts. More than 90% of the Indian Mussalmans are descendants of converted Hindus and belong as much to the Indian nation as the Hindus themselves. This process of conversion has continued all along; Jinnah is himself a descendant of a Hindu,converted in fairly recent times,named Jinabhai and many of the most famous Mahommedan leaders have a similar origin."(SABCL, vol.26, page 46).

It was Dr Mookerjee who stood firm and tried to organize a people's movement against partition. He said: “Hindus regard this country as their sacred and holy land. Irrespective of provincial barriers or the diversity in faiths and languages there exists a remarkable economic and cultural unity and inter-dependence which cannot be destroyed at the will of persons and parties who think it beneath their dignity to regard India as their motherland. We must live and die for India and her liberty.” (24th December 1944).

He disagreed with Gandhi placating the Muslim demands and said,"As soon as the other communities realize that the Hindus of India are united and have pledged themselves to stand together for the attainment of their ideal and have adopted a policy of understanding and tolerance to all classes of people residing in India, other communities whose support we are seeking in vain today will then join us voluntarily and on terms honourable to all.”(“Awake Hindusthan”, Page 12).

He further said: “Our experiences in recent years have proved that much as we would be willing to surrender the rights and interests of the Hindus for the purpose of placating other communities, much as we would like to pursue the policy of delivering “blank cheques” the response from the other side is slow and halting, if not sometimes hostile in character.("Awake Hindusthan", Page 13)

In this context, I would like to add that however different Jinnah might have been , we just can't belittle Nehru before Jinnah. Nehru belonged to us; he fought for India’s freedom, spent years in jail and had an Indian dream. We may have a thousand differences with him on policies and programmes, but so what? That would be our "domestic matter". Jinnah led our motherland’s vivisection and he never fought for the freedom struggle.

MJ Akbar has written these lines describing his persona,"Muhammad Ali Jinnah, aristocrat by temperament, catholic in taste, sectarian in politics, and the father of Pakistan, was the unlikeliest parent that an Islamic republic could possibly have. He was the most British of the generation of Indians that won freedom in August 1947. As a child in the elite Christian Mission High School in Karachi, he changed his birthday from 20 October to Christmas Day. As a student at Lincoln's Inn, he anglicised his name from Jinnahbhai to Jinnah. For three years, between 1930 and 1933, he went into voluntary exile in Hampstead, acquired a British passport, set up residence with his sister Fatimah and daughter Dina, hired a British chauffeur (Bradley) for his Bentley, kept two dogs (a black Dobermann and a white West Highland terrier), indulged himself at the theatre (he had once wanted to be a professional actor so that he could play Hamlet) and appeared before the Privy Council to maintain himself in the style to which he was accustomed. He wore Savile Row suits, heavily starched shirts and two-tone leather or suede shoes……Despite being the Quaid-e-Azam, or the Great Leader of Muslims, he drank a moderate amount of alcohol and was embarrassingly unfamiliar with Islamic methods of prayer. He was uncomfortable in any language but English, and made his demand for Pakistan — in 1940 at Lahore — in English, despite catcalls from an audience that wanted to hear Urdu.”

That was a bit of Syama Prasad and the related reflections that may prove worthwhile in the present political debate enveloping the nationalist school of politics. At the end of it, what the Gita has said and the RSS teaches us must make the final lines to this blogpost:

It’s better to die unwavering even in tatters than to change track midway and die stinking rich.

That’s Dharma.

Krishna said: "Swadharme nidhano shreyo (to live and die in ones’ own path alone is the life worthwhile and adopting the ‘other’ dharma is horrible)".

For small desires we lose a lifetime’s achievements and glory.

History was never made essentially by those who became state heads, but often by those who didn’t.

Or by those who gave up everything for others’ good, honestly. Syama Prasad and Deen Dayal Upadhyaya are two major icons of faith for the Hindu nationalist parivar. Both created history and died in their early fifties. Both were mysteriously ‘murdered’. Their lives must light the path of those who care to follow swadharma.

That’s BJP’s legacy too. As it is of other ideologically committed organisations of the saffron hue.

Lincoln didn’t shy away from the civil war and stood like a rock on the question of American spirit and unity. So was Syama Prasad. He died but didn’t bend.

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

In 1947 an India of the elite, rich and English-speaking got freedom and started enjoying the fruits of a truncated independence achieved at the cost of an unprecedented massacre. Farmers, tribals, the scheduled castes and poor Indians of all denominations remained outside the zone of a progress so passionately touted by our Prime Ministers and leaders.

The result of that progress is this: 2009 has been declared drought-hit, the disabled have to demand through demonstrations a place in the Right to Education Act, rivers are drying, farmland is fast shrinking giving space to malls and multiplexes, small and marginal farmers are either committing suicide or sending their children to other more beneficial and stable vocations. Primary education in villages has yet to get proper attention and in most hill areas potable water is still brought home from a distance source which can be, in some cases, two to three kilometres away. In politics, a caste-conscious regime rules — scheduled castes and tribes are treated as showpieces or their leadership gets too corrupt and self-obsessed forgetting the cause of the social segment they represent. At the ground level, our interaction with tribals and scheduled castes remains formal, untouchability hasn't gone out of our minds.

It's Bharat that needs freedom from the Indian colonialists who decide, sign files, devastate huge chunks of land for big dams and power projects and do not care a hoot about the rehabilitation of the evacuees. It's India that doesn't hesitate to start projects killing the Ganga up in the hills making it trickle where it used to roar like a lion enchanting the entire region.

It's Bharat that travels sleeper class in unreserved coaches and sees every day new schemes for the affluent elite, yet keeps on working, happier with an NREGS and giving votes in the biggest numbers thus protecting the honour of our democracy. Bharat tills the farms, sees the water level going down every year, weaves the mats for schools, works a coolie to the nation and yet always gets the slap, the hurt and the punch of all that's decided by those who never had a feel for the underprivileged except when they seek votes.

Bharat is the voter, India the ruler.

Three days before August 15, I was in Chamaseri, a village five kilometres from Mussoourie, which we call the "queen of the hills" because that is what the British called it. It has a number of internationally famous schools which charge per student as high as Rs 7 lakh a year. There is no dearth of power supply and drinking water which is clean and safe. Roads reach the doorsteps of the residents and students are comfortably placed enjoying studies and the cool weather. Chamaseri, has a population of about 1,000 people. A gram sabha is functioning which means it has at least 250 houses. It's just behind the Woodstock School, famous for having educated some of our elite political leaders' siblings. But it's not connected with Mussoourie through any road. We had to walk eight kilometres each way, through a rough hilly terrain full of big stones and muddy craters to reach a friend who lived on the other side of the village. We saw a couple of naked electric poles and wondered why they were so powerless? A villager sarcastically said that a year back they had erected the poles to get votes. Now votes have been cast so they forgot to put wires in them. Yes, this village in the backyards of Woodstock doesn't have electric supply. Children walk to Mussoourie to study in Ramabai School, run by the local government as there is no school in the village. It means walking eight to nine kilometres each way, almost two hours, as the school is situated at another end of Mussoourie. Children, little kids wih a bagload of books on their backs leave home at six in the morning to reach school by eight, spend the day there and return home by six in the evening. Many times they have to carry extra load on their heads bringing kitchen needs from the city. On a holiday or often on their return from school, they are sent to forest to collect firewood for cooking and grass for cows. A little girl, not more than eight, was bringing a load of green grass on her head, I tried to weigh it by lifting it. Believe me it was too heavy, must have been about 25kg. And she was bringing it from two kilometres from her home that took a tough hilly terrain. It's a daily routine for her. And of course the village doesn't have any landline telephone connections.

(Daughter of Garhwal: Burdened at this tender age yet smiles abound)

I asked some silly questions like what if there is an emergency. (They take patients on a charpoy to Mussoourie, where the nearest government hospital is located). How do you communicate with relatives living in distant areas? (Through post cards). What do you watch on TV channels in the evening? (They don't have any TV as there is no power supply). Have you been given proper care instructions about Swine flu? (What is that, sardi jukam?) What books do you read and is there a library? (They work in lantern and chimney lights, hence can only concentrate on school textbooks). Hospital? (There is one building coming up for it. Doctors will arrive only after the building is done).

(She will traverse the path on her left to reach the green area where her home is, with this load for the cows.)

That's Bharat, Sir

Forget about politicos. What about those who turned Mussoourie into a money spinning station to them and enjoyed a life of a sahib? Why didn't they think they had a social responsibility towards those who provide the chai, servants, chaprasi and vegetables and grains? Have the British left, really?

(This girl, a Class VII student, brings home a sackful of goods from Mussoourie with her school bag hung on the shoulders. Every day she walks 8km way to study and brings household goods too.)

That's visible in most of the rural areas that makes the real Bharat. From Nandigram to Sylhet and Udalguri to Phulbani. India acts through khaki. Killings, arrests and no hearing and accountability. The Manipur episode is not an isolated one. If something of this kind happens to the Indian brown sahibs they would threaten to secede. Why should I have my love for a state that doesn't have any relation with me except collecting votes and tax and giving bullets and backwardness in return? I can love Bharat as my nation but the state power's ruthless rudeness needs to be punished. But how? Through guns? Or use people's power?

Gun never succeeds, it never has

The only solution lies in collecting strength on the basis of positive resolution of people's consolidation. It alone wins ultimately. Gandhi did it and succeeded. Hedgewar did it and showed it works. So can us.

(The poles are there but the wires are missing.)

Here are some tips to begin

Instead of blaming the government for every ill, start a public-interest group, adopt an area to spread literacy, and teach hygiene and etiquettes, organize small help centres like "how to use RTI" and get information about MPs and MLAs funds distribution.

(On the road to Chamaseri, a girl takes fuel wood home for evening cooking.)

Land acquisition is a big racket and it's killing farmers and a social life. Try to collect data about how much land has been converted for non-agricultural use and write letters to editor in local newspapers creating awareness and appealing to people to petition courts to stop urbanization of farmlands.

Plan a holiday in the northeast. It's the most panoramic part of our nation but too neglected and ignored. We must be as naturally going to the northeast as we go to Haridwar or Shimla. It's a great experience in fun and national integration.

Send the best child in the family to join the forces. It's a shame that forces are lacking good human material and they have to advertise to attract youngsters to join their ranks. There can be nothing more satisfying than serving in any wing of our security set-up. Start distributing beautifully designed stickers for the vehicles of those whose children have joined forces, saying "proud parents of a soldier"'. It helps create a patriotic atmosphere.

Try spending a weekend in a village close by. Learn and teach your children about the importance of village life, its autonomous structure, meet people and share a meal. Maybe you will find a child who needs your help or an old man who would like you to write his application to the district magistrate or you may use your connections to expedite a project for the common good. Nothing will be more satisfying than this, believe me.

Remember Ramakrishna Paramhansa said: "Jeever Seva, Shiver Seva" (to serve humans is to serve gods). I don't think we need more temples and mosques and churches, whatever we have is enough to make God hear our petitions and prayers. If humans are living a miserable life, what use is it spending millions on such structures? Ensure that the temple in your vicinity or any place of worship is kept clean and puja is conducted correctly; that will be more useful than erecting a new structure. Our places of worship should cater to the needs of the society. If they teach how to face swine flu in such times, and why we shouldn't panic, that will be more in tune with serving the gods. The temple must start teaching physical exercises to keep the body fit and inspire devotees to make religious groups for river cleaning and stopping the use of plastics while on a pilgrimage. After all, rivers are dirtied and plastic bags thrown in our holy places by devotees only. Why can't we start a reformist action at such places?

Saturday, August 8, 2009

Last week I was on a TV discussion on a famous channel with Shabana Azmi, Mahesh Bhatt and Emraan Hashmi, the complainant who said he was denied an apartment because of his faith. He could not provide a single instance that would substantiate his arguments. I was pained to see that instead of upholding the values of a justifiable secularism and fairness, these celebrities wanted to buy a few headlines through cheap gimmicks and didn't mind vitiating the communal atmosphere. They virtually had no argument, no facts to prove their so-called grievances, yet tried to humiliate and belittle a majority that has been so supportive of their careers and given them unlimited love without considering which religion they belong to. That they will return the love of people by maligning them speaks of their own deep-rooted prejudices against the majority.

Emraan Hashmi, who didn’t get fame through excellence in acting but by a stunt of kisses, has done a male Rakhi Sawant on the nation with gullible people watching in shock and a trivialized media lapping it up as a five-rupee ice candy. To such a shameless person who earned money and headlines with the majority Hindu support and showed the temerity to abuse them so fictitiously for the apparent reasons to buy media coverage for his coming movie, a severe punishment must be given charging him of vitiating the communal atmosphere and provoking hatred among people who are already fatigued with post-terror-strike trauma. In a country where the biggest house of the land — the Rashtrapati Bhavan — and the chief minister’s bungalow in Mumbai had been occupied by Muslims, Hashmi raised a fictitious issue to malign the majority and the land for cheap publicity. Nobody would object if the housing society is found guilty and punished, but what if Hashmi is proved a liar? Shouldn’t he be given an exemplary punishment simply because he wanted to kill the residual harmonious relations between the communities?

In any case, every house owner and a community-based society reserves the right to decide whom to sell or rent out property it owns. Like in Delhi and other cities, the feelings based on biradari or community bonds matter more than anything else. There are colonies for journalists and it’s very difficult, if not impossible, for a non-media person to get a house there. In IAS officers’ colonies, an IFS officer finds it difficult to get a house. It's the biradari feeling; everyone likes to live in a group with which he shares the worldview and can communicate. Likewise Punjabis face problems in finding a house on rent in many Delhi localities and in a Muslim-dominated area Hindus won’t be entertained — see the Okhla-Batla House locality. Many houseowners won’t rent out their property to meat-eaters even if they are Hindus and in some areas Tamils and Bengalis are preferred for being cool and peaceful, while in other areas they are not. So should it become mandatory for everyone to sell or rent out his property to anyone liking it? It’s an obscene proposition. One can try to change the communal biases through various other means but the way Hashmi has chosen. Persons like Hashmi give a bad name to their community also by raising such petty issues as a cover for advance publicity for their coming movies. Hence all Muslims and Hindus alike, in a show of solidarity that upholds values of the Indian tricolour, must refuse a house for a communally hateful Hashmi in Maharashtra for at least a year. That will serve as a deterrent for other "Rakhi Sawants" also who raised the issue of woman’s dignity — and earned publicity — through Women’s Rights Commission, etc, gained a hefty fee rise in the tinsel market and of course more roles.

Of late a tendency to use secularism for ruffling Hindu sensitivities has been dangerously on the rise. Someone has to work out a balance and mark a point where all such largesses would end. One segment of our society gets — on purely religious grounds — government reservations, special bank loans, segregated universities which receive huge amounts of grants from Saudi Arabia and Iran and open special centres to encourage learning about a world that breeds Taliban and terrorists. And collect donations to help those who have been accused by Delhi police as waging a war against the nation. Have you ever wondered why Muslim universities are always tagged to the Arab world and never think to have special centres to study our neighbouring countries like Nepal and Sri Lanka which have closer and friendlier civilisational ties with India? Why always the language and culture of those areas which have sent attackers and marauders to India find a warm heart on such campuses? Why not a Thai, a Laosian or a Cambodian study centre?

Every Khan in Bollywood lives on the money and popularity earned from non-discriminatory Indian people that goes beyond religious fault lines but not a single Khan has ever raised his voice in favor of justice to Hindus in any incident that involved their brutalization by jihadis or like-minded extremist elements. An unconfirmed incident of an "apartment sell refusal" becomes a national issue as the media take it up, simply because a Muslim was involved. But never, even for once, has a Muslim taken up the cause of Kashmiri Hindus ousted from their ancestral property in Kashmir and exiled to live as refugees in their own independent motherland called India. Neither a Shabana nor a Mahesh Bhatt raised his voice against the refusal of Kashmiri Muslim leaders to give "even an inch of land" to Amarnath pilgrims, for yatra camps. There are Muslims who win elections from Hindu majority constituencies, yet would not hesitate to hit at Hindu sentiments. Should that be taken as a token of their secularism? Why can't we have the spirit of Indianism above all boundaries?

These celebrities are taking Hindu sentiments for granted and think that their acting style would cover their communal prejudices. It comes out on occasions like the Hashmi episode.

I had almost finished my book on my Balochistan sojourn when the region hit the headlines fiercely. The people of this region are immensely India-friendly. I was there three years ago in a "first of its kind" pilgrimage to Mata Hinglaj, the "kuldevi" (family deity) of kshatriyas. The temple is situated in the rugged mountains of Balochistan. The yatra was made possible by the efforts of Jaswant Singh, then Union minister and an ardent devotee of Devi. We went by road, first time post-independence, via Munabao and Thar Parkar, crossing Amarkot (renamed as Umarkot, where Akbar was born), Mirpurkhas and Karachi. My inclusion in the group was a sort of miracle — last day, last pilgrim, that too thanks to the then Pakistan high commissioner Aziz Ahmed Khan.

It has all the ingredients to make people brave and courageous. Seashore, awesome mountain ranges (Gwadar lies in its vicinity and to reach Mata Hinglaj, we travelled on Gwadar highway), Hingol river (named after the vermillion, or hingula, of Devi Parvati), the Central Makran Range and the Makran Coast Range, sandstone ridges and a tough life in a rough terrain. The road to Hinglaj in Balochistan was one of the toughest pilgrimages in our history as travelogues have described, taking more than 45 days from Karachi on camels through hot, arid and dacoit-infested desert. Death or "darshan" defined the mission. A famous Bengali movie on Hinglaj pilgrimage had Uttam Kumar in the lead role, which described it as the pilgrimage of a lifetime. But thanks to the Chinese, a national coastal highway is built up to Gwadar port that takes us to Aghore, where we turn right for the temple. Airconditioned Toyota vans had replaced the camels.

Still, journey from Karachi fatigued us so much we could imagine the travails of earlier pilgrims. Now a semi-pucca road of 22km right up to Nani Mandar, as the signboard describes the Hinglaj temple, had been built by Baloch state government under the then chief minister Jam Yousaf Mir Mohammed, former nawab of Lasbela, the district the Hinglaj temple is situated in. Fire, thunder and sandstone sculpted mountains mark the road to Hinglaj. It's a great centre of reverence and as the belief is, Parvati’s self-immolation in her father’s "yajna" drove an angry Shiva take the body of his divine consort and travel as many as 52 places where various parts of her body fell and at each such place a "shaktipeeth" or the seat of indescribable spiritual power emerged. One such "peeth" is Hinglaj, where the forehead of Devi with vermillion mark had fallen. For a millennium the pilgrimage to this great seat of Shakti is going on. That Shiva reached from the Himalayas to this region where the sea of sand mingles with blue deep shores of the Arabian Sea while magic appears on the horizon at sunset is an unparalleled tale of our civilisational flow.

The Baloch are hospitable and proud people. The factor of "izzat" is paramount and the Khans will give their lives or take others' to save their "honour". Pakistan’s rulers have always been hurting Baloch pride since partitioned independence. The ruler of Balochistan Mir Ahmad Yar Khan declared independence in 1947 but was coerced by Jinnah to sign documents of accession, with a loosely granted permission to act under the provisions of old Baloch traditional constitution called "Rawaj". But Baloch nationalists never accepted Pakistan’s rule and local uprisings kept brewing. The only mass-supported organization Anjuman-i-Watan Party, led by Samad Achakzai, a staunch supporter of Gandhi’s Congress, was banned and the Pakistan army took complete control of the region, beginning an era of brutal suppression, killings, and forced backwardness. Highly profitable gas finds in the Sui region made Islamabad’s Punjabi rulers billionaires and Gwadar helped Pindi’s army officers to buy huge chunks of land and earn profits. The Baloch people see their land and resources being used to provide luxuries to those who never belonged to them. Hence the rebellion.

In 1958, an octogenarian leader of the Baloch people, Nawab Nowroz Khan, led an armed struggle for independence which was crushed by the Pakistan army led by Lt Gen Tikka Khan, who invited the Nawab for negotiations along with his sons and nephews, but instead executed the sons and nephews without a trial. The Nawab died later in jail. From 1963’s liberation war, which lasted till 1969, led by Sher Mohammad Bijarani Marri to the big rebellion, which is known as Baloch Civil War in the 70s, the Baloch people have never reconciled with the Pakistani rule. The 70s war was morally strengthened by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s demand for a separate Bangladesh. Stalwarts like Ghaus Bux Bizenjo, Sardar Ataullah Mengal, Khair Bux Marri and Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti led the movement for liberation. It was again suppressed by the warlike response of the Pakistan army. Thousands have been killed and arrested without a trial, increasing and intensifying the hurt in the hearts of the Baloch people.

In 2005 again, Baloch nationalists rose to demand the protection of their rights and safeguarding Baloch cultural identity. In response the Pakistani army killed their 79-year-old leader Nawab Akbar Khan Bugti in August 2006.

Forming 43% of Pakistan’s total area with a population of about 6.5 million, Balochistan remains the weakest point of Pakistan, which has been ruled by leaders insensitive to Baloch realities and aspirations.

Local Baloch Khans had been friendly with the Hindus whose numbers were about 54,000 in 1941. Baloch Hindus had a great physique and controlled trade and education sectors till 1947. After the Pakistan army’s complete control over the area, their numbers have reduced to almost less than a half. Hindu concentration is limited to Las Bela, Uthelo, Mithi and Chaman. A large number of them are Valmikis doing menial jobs. Unfortunately the breeze of reform never reached the Hindus in these areas and the so-called low-caste Hindus are suffering the worst kind of "distanced relation" and isolation. How many of them still survive? Nobody has an authentic data but those whom we met at the cave of Mata Hinglaj temple belonged to the affluent sections of the Hindus. There were doctors, traders and engineers who were supporters of parties like Jamate Islami and Pakistan People’s Party. They have learnt to live in their own shell, agreeing to be low-profile and learning ways to survive in a hostile atmosphere. One of the ways is to join available Muslim parties and another, like the Hindu women have learnt, is to refrain from showing marks like bindis that identify them as Hindus. It's better to be invisible as a Hindu when you are moving out, said one of them.

I met a couple of singers who sang beautiful hymns in praise of Mata Hinglaj and almost all of them had a word of praise for Baloch Muslims. Muslims call this sacred place as Nani Mandar or the temple of the elder.

Devi is a witness to the worst kind of upheavals of history. One can only hope sanity will prevail, bringing peace to this land of devotion.

The biggest victim of terrorism on earth is being accused of fomenting terror. That's no mean achievement of a state power that is busy making friendship with a terror state whose boy is pleading in our court to hang him for killing 166 people last year. Hundreds of thousands of patriotic Indians killed, raped, uprooted and turned refugees, maimed and humiliated on their own soil by a bloody jihad that has been directly sponsored by Pakistan. See the tones of papers and factual data sheets printed by the XP division of the ministry of external affairs. But the government that pays for printing such fact sheets accepted a joint communiqué sharing the concerns of the state that it has been accusing of sponsoring bloodbath in India, in such a way that the accuser is now accusing us. Firing on Sri Lankan cricketers in Lahore was sponsored by India - that's the latest one. From the days of Indira Gandhi to Rao and Vajpayee, all governments were engaging Pakistan in a dialogue but never did such a fiasco occur - the murderous state raising an accusing finger at us and us nodding.

Banana spines can never make a rock, even if collected in millions. A forgetful people and a condescending state can never make a nation nor protect it. Pakistan was created after the massacre of a million innocent people, who had to leave their home and hearth because some leaders had accepted the partition. It was preceded by horrendous killings of Hindus in Kolkata, Punjab and Delhi. Immediately after that, in September 1947, it attacked us and forcibly occupied a part of Kashmir, Gilgit and Skardu that saw the heart-wrenching killings of Mirpur. Still, it wanted its share of Rs 55 crore to be given. And we gave. Noted historian Y D Phadke has described the episode thus, "a sum of Rs 55 crore was the money that was Pakistan's share, from the cash of Rs 375 crore in the vaults of the Reserve Bank of India before partition. On December 1 and 2, 1947, representatives of both countries had discussed the issue and decided that of the cash balance of Rs 375 crore, Pakistan's share was Rs 75 crore. Out of this sum of Rs 75 crore, Rs 20 crore had been given to Pakistan to temporarily take care of its financial needs when Pakistan was just coming into existence on August 14, 1947, and it was decided in the agreement of December 2, 1947, that the balance amount of Rs 55 crore should be handed over later by the Indian Government to the Pakistan Government. Pakistan had a right to this cash of Rs 55 crore and the Indian Government recognized this right. In order to satisfy Pakistan's financial need, the Indian Reserve Bank had indicated its readiness to approve a temporary loan of Rs 10 crore and Deshmukh had been told that the Reserve Bank had to take a final decision and that the Government of India would not interfere. That is why in the meeting at Lahore on January 11, 1948, Prime Minister Nehru had indicated that he was favourably disposed to give Pakistan Rs 10 crore as a temporary loan. Thereupon, Liaquat Ali asked Nehru: "Then why don't you give Pakistan the 55 crore rupees you owe us and put an end to the matter?"

Nehru didn't agree but Gandhi forced him through a fast and finally, after all that Mirpur massacre and losing Gilgit, India gave Pakistan 55 crore.

After that Pakistan "gifted" a part of our land to China. (Govt of India says Pakistan is in illegal and forcible occupation of about 78,000 sq km in Jammu and Kashmir and has illegally ceded 5,180 sq km of Indian territory to China.)

We had 1971, still didn't resolve Kashmir. We had Punjab's Khalistan terrorism, directly sponsored by Gen Zia Ul Haq's Pakistan. Then had to fight the Kargil war. Still gave a red-carpeted welcome to the man in khaki who was responsible for the death of our 600 soldiers.

And now we are foolishly looking at Islamabad, blood-soaked, yet finding ourselves in a question box.

That's Pakistan. And we are bending over backwards to get a certificate of good conduct from it. And expecting it will change for the good.

Isn't it a shame that a country doesn't feel hurt at the loss of 1.25 lakh sq km to the enemy, didn't feel angry, didn't resolve to take revenge for the loss of our 600 soldiers in Kargil and teach a lesson to a mischievously unrepentant neighbour? So much so that the discredited Musharraf still gets honourable platforms to big-mouth in Delhi. Who felt hurt that the anniversary of Kargil victory was completely ignored by the government, no one paid tributes to the soldiers, there were no special shows on TV channels? Who felt hurt to read stories of the Kargil heroes who lost their limbs and are forced to live at a paltry pension of Rs 5,000? In a country where insulting, humiliating and shamefully ignoring the heroes of war is a politically beneficial practice to garner minority votes, a Kalam honour outcry looks nothing more than a media shamanism. A self-defeating secularism allows a pro-terrorist Jamia crowd clubbed with the apologists to Azamgarh-Batla house syndrome who collected funds for the accused through a vice-chancellor, speak against the Human Rights Commission's clean chit to the police and restoring the honour of Inspector M C Sharma, who was humiliated by Congress and SP leaders even after his heroic death.

This is us and that is Pakistan. Those who bask only in a reflected glory eclipse India's truth.

The eclipse is secular in its darkness that has affected the Indian soul and we ignore the core issue to run after cosmetics. Just have a relook at Kalam saheb's episode.

Agreed Abdul Kalam shouldn't have been frisked. He represents not just his individual persona, but also our country's honour. They know what the Americans do in security matters and Kalam might be a great hero to us, but safety-conscious Americans must be apprised much before to have a proper, honourable safe passage to our ex-head of the state. Was that done? Secondly, those who are agitated over the frisking of Kalam are silent on Rahul Gandhi and Robert Vadra being given the privilege of passing through airport security without a check. Why and on what grounds?

At the end of the day, Kalam remains a great sermoniser who hardly had any action to his credit, except writing morally right good books and attending inaugural functions while fully enjoying all the fruits of a presidency post-retirement. From Kashmir's exiled patriots to Kohima's anti-national insurgency, what did he do to restore faith in the tricolour and protect the honour of those who swear by India? When he is frisked, the starved media makes it an issue and everyone jumps on to the bandwagon. Is this "insult" greater than the hurt our soldiers get from the sultans of Raisina Hill?